• jet@hackertalks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I think about the same thing every time I watch a time travel movie or show.

    They should teleport into empty space every time

    • ekky43@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I guess that depends on whether you only travel through time (time vs space), or whether you follow the time-line back (aka. travel through time and space, kinda like both you and I are doing right now).

      EDIT: there’s also the reference point, and whether you can bring a physical vessel, or have to possess your younger self.

      Back to the Future appears to be using a kind of relative spatial reference point, and you bring your body along the ride.

      Contrary, Steins Gate (the part shown in the series) uses a body as reference, and has you “possess” said body. Though it hints that Back to the Future-like travel is also possible.

      Not sure if I can name any story where time and space are disconnected.

      • jet@hackertalks.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Larry niven and the known space universe. Doesn’t have time travel, but does have a form of teleportation, where you have to offset the energies for velocity changes between teleport target and teleport destination.

        • mindbleach
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Larry Niven also wrote that hard science fiction is giving the audience enough information for them to tell you it wouldn’t work.

    • intensely_human@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      This assumes some concept of location independent of the surrounding matter.

      We like to think that way because we live on a mostly-not-changing clump of rock and dirt.

      There is nothing to define location other than what’s nearby.

      The only alternative anyone ever proposes is larger clumps of matter further away. Relative to the sun. Relative to the center of the Milky Way. Center of the Milky Way is the most “legit” Nonmoving Point we can think of.

      But maybe the legitimacy of the nonmoving point is based also on its nearness to you. Perhaps the thing that defines the wormhole’s position through spacetime is inertia and gravity.

      Hard to see what else it might be, other than “it doesn’t move” which, the entire point above being, doesn’t really exist